“Defence of the Soviet Union begins at Diego Garcia!”
— old Spartacist slogan
There’s nothing about Gillian Triggs in The Australian today. But there will be tomorrow. Or next week. Or the week after that. Triggs has been designated an official enemy by the Right, and this week’s flurry of attacks will continue. If there’s been a lull at the moment, it’s simply because they are digging up dirt, or trying to.
Triggs is in the cross-hairs for the recent report on children in detention on Manus Island — a story of horror, torture and psychological damage that is difficult to read at times. The report is meticulous and has taken time. The Abbott government accuses it of being a political bomb because it has landed halfway through their term — instead, presumably, of being released, half-done and perfunctory, in the dying days of Labor, which also imposed the policy.
Attacking Triggs’ report for being political because it tells the truth about refugee detention is grimly hilarious, like an eastern European Cold War era play about someone being tried for slandering socialism by telling stories about the Gulag. “But it’s true!” “Exactly, comrade. That’s what makes it such a serious slander.”
The ferocity of the attack, from Parliament and Newscrap, is an attack on the report, an attack on the Australian Human Rights Commission, and an attack on Triggs herself, and the sort of person she is — a woman-lawyer from the heart of the left-liberal rights project. The attack is strategic, but there’s a degree of anger and frustration within it. Triggs personifies aspects of the world — liberal, procedural, reasonable, professional, female — that drives men like Abbott and Brandis to conniptions. The male-menopausal chorus in the conservatoriat are happy to join in.
Triggs has already hit back, quite wisely, and shows no signs of being fazed by such attacks. But that doesn’t mean such attacks have no impact. Such attacks are designed as a form of psychological warfare, to get inside the head of the person under attack. The Australian specialises in this, because it’s run by bullies, and they hire bullies to do the petty work. They get off on contemplating the damage they’ll do to people — all the more, the more the Abbott government turns out to be a dud and a disaster.
That’s why defending Triggs in particular, and the position she speaks from in general, is now a vital and immediate task for the refugee movement. And I don’t think they’ve fully realised this yet. There’s an obvious reason — the conditions of people in Manus and elsewhere is so desperate that someone over here getting a bit of heat from the failing political Right appears to be somewhere down the list of urgent causes.
But that’s a big mistake, because that’s what the toxic Right rely on in conducting these wars. The Right will gather around a threatened personage — until, as with Abbott, they decide to more or less drop him — and they know the Left will parse degrees of suffering, and decide that they can’t, even for a short time, shift energy from the immediate task, the wretched of the earth in a de facto stateless island prison.
But for the moment, defending Triggs is the most necessary and immediate way of advancing the cause of people on Manus, and on the next half-dozen refugee hells we establish. The Spart slogan that begins this piece is an example of what’s known in the trade as an “angular” slogan — it shows how the whole is bodied forth in the part, Diego Garcia being the A-bomb raddled island group with a major Indian Ocean US base.
In that spirit, “attacking the mandatory detention regime begins with the defence of Gillian Triggs”. Because we have to defend the person and the process by which the truth about such things is laid bare, and hit back against such attacks with double the force. I don’t mean hashtags or angry tweets, I mean that the dominant refugee action groups need to divert some resources to a campaign in Triggs’ support. Some of that is the usual stuff, petitions, etc, but some of it needs to be more direct. And it wouldn’t take much.
For example, a leaflet drop in three Liberal marginal seats with a strong left-liberal component — the so-called doctors’ wives seats — would do the trick. You don’t even need to do the whole electorate, just find the half-dozen booths with the highest Green vote, and do it in those areas. Include a pre-paid postcard to the local member with the leaflet — about defending the AHRC and its head from political attack — and then retire to a safe distance.
It’s not going to take more than 50 such cards going to each marginal member — hanging on their seats for dear life, hoping Abbott gets hit by a tram in the Nullarbor before, say, September — to start concentrating the mind. Small cost, big hit. Especially if it were repeated in two or three states.
Or something like it anyway. Could be any one of half a dozen things, but that’s what’s needed. Quite aside from anything else, no matter how tough someone is and accustomed to the attacks, they have a chilling effect. Responding to them is about people being clear that there is an attack on, and that solidarity with one is solidarity with all.
And defence of the Soviet Union begins at Diego Garcia.
“Triggs personifies aspects of the world — liberal, procedural, reasonable, professional, female — that drives men like Abbott and Brandis to conniptions.”
That’s right, and a very useful list of the qualities that get under the skins of tory, and some not so tory, alpha males. “Procedural” is a very pertinent inclusion. Triggs, Gillard – they challenge male ego-might-is-right Romantic irrationalism.
It’s especially apt for the Crikey Kremlin to quote long-discredited Marxists; but if you want to assemble a defence of Ms Triggs which holds water outside of your intellectual bunker, you really should consider how you can ‘explain’ her odd timetable of releasing information to the general public.
Or have you already thought about this and realised you must continue running “new” stories which recycle the same old intellectually bereft material and hopefully will help distract readers who might otherwise check back on the Triggs history?
Triggs the victim!!!
Triggs attacked by sexist old men!!!
Triggs the warrior for desperate refugees!!
Triggs must be defended now!!
Your rara polemic mobilising the troops to campaign for the people against the establishment plays well in the cloisters of leftie echo chambers. Hey maybe Crikey is on the home straight to becoming a leftie echo chamber.
But it is completely irrelevant to the real world. Should the coalition lose power in 2016, ths border policy won’t change because the ALP will not repeat its most egregious policy stuff up of the 07-13 years.
The measures Triggs has attacked are bipartisan and widely supported by middle Australia. Your superficial focus on the children in detention, a soft target specifically chosen by Triggs because it gets most sympathetic airtime, fails to touch even the most basic factors involved.
For example, it’s the parents who are in detention centres and the children must be either separated from them or stay in detention with them. But such policy conundrums are beyond the superficial level of this article.
Likewise the fact that the PNG solution stopped the people smuggling trade across the Java Sea in its tracks. “You will never settle in Australia if you come by boat with no docs” has worked. Emptying the detention centres will almost certainly start the trade again but this article is too superficial to grapple with the real world conundrum here.
Triggs’ use of children as the point of attack on what is a successful policy that she doesn’t like is indeed shameful. This superficial rara piece doesn’t even have the subtlety she used to just soft focus on children and then let Australia’s border protection policy unravel from there.
Hmmm, I wonder if The Australian will be conducting an internal impartiality audit, just to see if there was any possible bias in their treatment of Gillian Triggs? Or is bias something that’s only likely to be found at the ABC?
And just out of idle curiosity, is there any sane people left at The Australian, or was George Megalogenis the last one?
Procedural? Reasonable? Professional?-What decisionmaker or quasi judicial report writer appears on national TV making adverse statements about the evidence heard so far in the middle of an enquiry?
Anyone else [a judge] would have been castigated or disciplined at the time-but there are a group of people who are THE UNTOUCHABLES -as per your repeated articles. Also helps if you are female, it is not polite or politic to criticise the ‘fairer’ sex. As Juia’s misogynist monologue shows – What misandrist world!